Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 2/2017

26.09.2016 | Commentary

Commentary regarding a recent collaborative consensus statement addressing prostate MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy in patients with a prior negative prostate biopsy

verfasst von: Sadhna Verma, Andrew B. Rosenkrantz, Peter Choyke, Steven C. Eberhardt, Scott E. Eggener, Krishnanath Gaitonde, Masoom A. Haider, Daniel J. Margolis, Leonard S. Marks, Peter Pinto, Geoffrey A. Sonn, Samir S. Taneja

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 2/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

Technology and experience in prostate cancer imaging have increased, along with its importance. Additionally, standards for the conduct and reporting of prostate MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy have been developed and refined [1, 2]. Moreover, the emergence of systems for MRI-targeted prostate biopsy has catalyzed greater incorporation of prostate imaging into routine patient care. Although standards from various organizations exist to guide physicians on the use of repeat prostate biopsy after an initial negative prostate biopsy, well-developed guidelines regarding the role of imaging in repeat biopsies are lacking [3]. In the recent joint statement of the American Urological Association (AUA) and the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR), Prostate MRI and MRI-Targeted Biopsy in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsy, a 12-member expert panel of radiologists and urologists appraised the peer-reviewed literature on the application of prostate MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy in patients with at least one negative prior biopsy in order to provide guidance on the use of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy in this setting. The full document is publicly available online and provides a series of individual consensus statements to assist clinical decisions for MRI-targeted prostate biopsy [4]. Issues addressed by the consensus statements include the impact of MRI-targeted biopsy on detection of clinically significant cancer, the approach for performing MRI-targeted biopsy, as well as the significance of a negative prostate MRI. This commentary summarizes the recommendations from the consensus statement. …
Literatur
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Vargas HA, Hotker AM, Goldman DA, et al. (2015) Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol . doi:10.1007/s00330-015-4015-6 Vargas HA, Hotker AM, Goldman DA, et al. (2015) Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol . doi:10.​1007/​s00330-015-4015-6
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, et al. (2015) Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol 68(4):713–720. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008 CrossRefPubMed Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, et al. (2015) Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol 68(4):713–720. doi:10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2015.​06.​008 CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Salami SS, Ben-Levi E, Yaskiv O, et al. (2015) In patients with a previous negative prostate biopsy and a suspicious lesion on magnetic resonance imaging, is a 12-core biopsy still necessary in addition to a targeted biopsy? BJU Int 115(4):562–570. doi:10.1111/bju.12938 CrossRefPubMed Salami SS, Ben-Levi E, Yaskiv O, et al. (2015) In patients with a previous negative prostate biopsy and a suspicious lesion on magnetic resonance imaging, is a 12-core biopsy still necessary in addition to a targeted biopsy? BJU Int 115(4):562–570. doi:10.​1111/​bju.​12938 CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaufmann S, Kruck S, Kramer U, et al. (2015) Direct comparison of targeted MRI-guided biopsy with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in patients with previous negative prostate biopsies. Urol Int 94(3):319–325. doi:10.1159/000365397 CrossRefPubMed Kaufmann S, Kruck S, Kramer U, et al. (2015) Direct comparison of targeted MRI-guided biopsy with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in patients with previous negative prostate biopsies. Urol Int 94(3):319–325. doi:10.​1159/​000365397 CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaufmann S, Bedke J, Gatidis S, et al. (2015) Prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) is of additional predictive value in patients with PI-RADS grade III (intermediate) lesions in the MR-guided re-biopsy setting for prostate cancer. World J Urol . doi:10.1007/s00345-015-1655-8 PubMed Kaufmann S, Bedke J, Gatidis S, et al. (2015) Prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) is of additional predictive value in patients with PI-RADS grade III (intermediate) lesions in the MR-guided re-biopsy setting for prostate cancer. World J Urol . doi:10.​1007/​s00345-015-1655-8 PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Durmus T, Reichelt U, Huppertz A, et al. (2013) MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate: correlation between the cancer detection rate and the number of previous negative TRUS biopsies. Diagn Interv Radiol 19(5):411–417. doi:10.5152/dir.2013.13055 PubMed Durmus T, Reichelt U, Huppertz A, et al. (2013) MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate: correlation between the cancer detection rate and the number of previous negative TRUS biopsies. Diagn Interv Radiol 19(5):411–417. doi:10.​5152/​dir.​2013.​13055 PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, et al. (2012) Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol 62(5):902–909. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.047 CrossRefPubMed Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, et al. (2012) Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol 62(5):902–909. doi:10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2012.​01.​047 CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. (2012) MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol 30(2):213–218. doi:10.1007/s00345-011-0675-2 CrossRefPubMed Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. (2012) MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol 30(2):213–218. doi:10.​1007/​s00345-011-0675-2 CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC, et al. (2014) A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. Eur Urol 66(2):343–351. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.048 CrossRefPubMed Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC, et al. (2014) A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. Eur Urol 66(2):343–351. doi:10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2013.​10.​048 CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Schouten MG, Hoeks CM, Bomers JG, et al. (2015) Location of prostate cancers determined by multiparametric and mri-guided biopsy in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen level and at least one negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205(1):57–63. doi:10.2214/ajr.14.12960 CrossRefPubMed Schouten MG, Hoeks CM, Bomers JG, et al. (2015) Location of prostate cancers determined by multiparametric and mri-guided biopsy in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen level and at least one negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205(1):57–63. doi:10.​2214/​ajr.​14.​12960 CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Cash H, Maxeiner A, Stephan C, et al. (2015) The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. World J Urol . doi:10.1007/s00345-015-1671-8 Cash H, Maxeiner A, Stephan C, et al. (2015) The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. World J Urol . doi:10.​1007/​s00345-015-1671-8
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, et al. (2013) Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 190(4):1380–1386. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043 CrossRefPubMed Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, et al. (2013) Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 190(4):1380–1386. doi:10.​1016/​j.​juro.​2013.​04.​043 CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, et al. (2015) Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol . doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008 PubMed Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, et al. (2015) Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol . doi:10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2015.​06.​008 PubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Tewes S, Hueper K, Hartung D, et al. (2015) Targeted MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy in men with previous prostate biopsies using a novel registration software and multiparametric MRI PI-RADS scores: first results. World J Urol . doi:10.1007/s00345-015-1525-4 PubMed Tewes S, Hueper K, Hartung D, et al. (2015) Targeted MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy in men with previous prostate biopsies using a novel registration software and multiparametric MRI PI-RADS scores: first results. World J Urol . doi:10.​1007/​s00345-015-1525-4 PubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Porpiglia F, Russo F, Manfredi M, et al. (2014) The roles of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, PCA3 and prostate health index-which is the best predictor of prostate cancer after a negative biopsy? J Urol 192(1):60–66. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.030 CrossRefPubMed Porpiglia F, Russo F, Manfredi M, et al. (2014) The roles of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, PCA3 and prostate health index-which is the best predictor of prostate cancer after a negative biopsy? J Urol 192(1):60–66. doi:10.​1016/​j.​juro.​2014.​01.​030 CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Commentary regarding a recent collaborative consensus statement addressing prostate MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy in patients with a prior negative prostate biopsy
verfasst von
Sadhna Verma
Andrew B. Rosenkrantz
Peter Choyke
Steven C. Eberhardt
Scott E. Eggener
Krishnanath Gaitonde
Masoom A. Haider
Daniel J. Margolis
Leonard S. Marks
Peter Pinto
Geoffrey A. Sonn
Samir S. Taneja
Publikationsdatum
26.09.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 2/2017
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0920-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2017

Abdominal Radiology 2/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.